Citation Name: 2025 PLD 15 KARACHI-HIGH-COURT-SINDHBookmark this Case DUR MUHAMMAD MALIK vs ZAFARULLAH MALIK a

Fields are extracted from the reported citation and judgment text. Where a detail is not stated in the record, it is not shown.

Citation Name: 2025 PLD 15 KARACHI-HIGH-COURT-SINDHBookmark this Case DUR MUHAMMAD MALIK VS ZAFARULLAH MALIK art.128---Specific Relief act (I of 1877), S.42---Suit for declaration---Parentage, determination of---Permission of Deoxyribonucleic acid Test ('DNa test') by a court in its revisional jurisdiction---Scope---Paternity claim of respondent (son) denied by appellant (father)---Contention of the appellant was that he had divorced mother of respondent two years prior to birth of respondent, therefore, respondent could not be his son and in order to resolve the controversy courts below should have ordered for DNa test---Validity---appellant did not deny respondent's paternity and he claimed that "he did not know", therefore, the court correctly drew an adverse presumption from his response---Respondent was born prior to divorce of appellant and his mother---appellant had declined to acknowledge respondent as his child after more than 18 years---Paternity of a child born in lawful wedlock carries the presumption of truth, and it cannot be refuted by simple denial---Law inclines towards the presumption of paternity rather than illegitimacy---Child born during wedlock has the parentage of the husband---There is no need for an express acknowledgement or an affirmation---Legitimacy of a child cannot be questioned merely because of the father's claim without any evidence to substantiate the same---appellant produced no evidence to controvert the evidence produced and relied upon by the respondent in support of his contention that he was the son of appellant---There was nothing available on record to suggest that appellant had moved either the trial or appellate courts to conduct DNa test---Resort to DNa testing may be made depending upon the facts and circumstances of the case where the evidence produced by both parties is evenly balanced that no conclusion can be drawn or where the party upon whom the onus lies has not produced any evidence---In the present case respondent had relied on documentary evidence, such as the school and educational records disclosing appellant as his father, whereas appellant could not question the paternity of respondent by asking for a DNa test, notwithstanding appellant put up such plea after more than 18 years of birth of respondent and that too before the court exercising revisional jurisdiction---Revision petition was dismissed accordingly.

Citation Name: 2025 PLD 15 KARACHI-HIGH-COURT-SINDHBookmark this Case DUR MUHAMMAD MALIK vs ZAFARULLAH MALIK art — 2025 PLD 15 KARACHI-HIGH-COURT-SINDH

Case information

Judgment text as reported

Other judgments reported in 2025 PLD